Ruptured Isolated Spinal Artery Aneurysms Report of Two Cases and Review of the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Isolated spinal artery aneurysms are exceedingly rare vascular lesions thought to be related to dissection of the arterial wall. We describe two cases presenting with spinal subarachnoid haemorrhage that underwent conservative management. In the first patient the radiculomedullary branch involved was feeding the anterior spinal artery at the level of D3 and thus, neither endovascular nor surgical approach was employed. Control angiography was performed at seven days and at three months, demonstrating complete resolution of the lesion. In our second case, neither the anterior spinal artery or the artery of Adamkiewicz could be identified during angiography, thus endovascular management was deemed contraindicated. Magnetic resonance imaging showed a stable lesion in the second patient. No rebleeding or other complications were seen. In comparison to intracranial aneurysms, spinal artery aneurysms tend to display a fusiform appearance and lack a clear neck in relation to the likely dissecting nature of the lesions. Due to the small number of cases reported, the natural history of these lesions is not well known making it difficult to establish the optimal treatment approach. Various management strategies may be supported, including surgical and endovascular treatment, but It would seem that a wait and see approach is also viable, with control angiogram and treatment decisions based on the evolution of the lesion.
Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.
How this classification was reachedexpand
The three-model screen
all 5,600 screened works →All three models called this out of scope.
Clinical case reports of spinal artery aneurysms with a literature review.
The review concerns treatment strategies for spinal artery aneurysms rather than evidence-synthesis methodology.
Clinical case series and literature review of spinal artery aneurysms; domain neurosurgery.
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".